Why is servicing so frequent?

[mistermexican]

Hi everyone,

After an aborted attempt at buying a Tuscan years ago I'm shortly going to be in a position to buy one and wanted to learn more about the car. The one thing I don't get is why the servicing is so frequent on them. I understand why the oil changes are and the valve clearances but I can't understand why the other items are required to be changed every 6k or 12k miles.

I can't see why spark plugs should be changed every 6k miles when NGK's own website says the plugs can last 40-50k miles. Or why coolant, gearbox and diff oils should be changed every 12k miles. My RB320 STi can manage 4 years/40k miles and 3 years/30k miles respectively. Everyone (including specialists) just say it's a "specialist car" or "TVR said so" so it requires it but no one has given any evidence as to why they're so frequent. One of my friends is a mechanical engineer for GM in Detroit and he thinks that the frequency just isn't necessary (or is being overly cautious) given that it's naturally aspirated and the STi's engine will be producing much more heat due to being heavily boosted so the coolant will be taking more of a toll. He also pointed out the the STi's diffs will under much more strain than the TVR's given the AWD system.

I was wondering if anyone had any real evidence as to why these items are required to be changes so frequently.

Any replies appreciated.

Thanks,
Richard

[mistermexican]

blueg33 said:

What do Ford say about the gearbox oil changes?

I must admit I haven't checked with Ford/Tremec. Having looked online it just says "refer to owner's/manufacturer's specifications hence my questions. I could kind of understand the more frequent service intervals for this given the amount of torque but I would have thought it would be about 20k miles. And I still don't understand the spark plug and coolant.

[mistermexican]

tofts said:

The answer is quite simple. Its a race car, highly stressed and can fail very easily. Servicing frequently will help you forsee problems before they arrise. They have been known to munch through cams/fingers/valvetrain in short order which will grenade the rest of the engine if not caught early. But you know that, so apply the logic further on.

Gearbox is right on the limit of its power handling capability (really 400bhp is the generally accepted limit) so an oil change is well worth the investment as above you can see early problems. Same for the diff, although it can handle much more power, it does get a harsh life if car is driven fast. I have seen fluid that has NOT been changed on a 15k car and it was nasty indeed.

Spark plugs are under a lot of stress and even after only 2k miles I have seen them break down and misfire. They get Very hot nestled in the middle of the engine, they always come out with brown rings on the ceramics regardless of age.

Brake fluid should be changed every 2 years as it starts to absorb LOTS of water and can boil, I mean why would you not want to change the fluid on the most critical part of your car?

Coolant is probably the only one thats overly cautious, as the 5 year life is just that really!

The other important reason, is if you dont service it at regular intervals, with bills to prove it. No one will want to buy the car.

Edited by tofts on Monday 6th March 19:50

I accept all of the above but it doesn't change the fact the NGK, the people who make the spark plugs, say that the upgraded parts can survive 6-8 times the mileage. The spark plugs will get very hot in any engine so I can't see why TVRs are so special for destroying them. Also, the Rover and AJP V8s have the same interval for the plugs and these aren't race engines. Unless the combustion is so bad or it runs far too rich or lean they can foul the plug but the cats would go first.

I wholeheartedly agree with preventative maintenance but there comes a point where it goes too far. It's a bit like saying the wiring in my house may degrade so I'll replace it every three years in case it causes a fire. Or it's kept going because certain people have a vested interest in keeping it that way, despite advances in technology or what the manufacturers of the parts say.

I completely agree on brake fluid though.

[mistermexican]

Andy_mr2sc said:

'It's a race car'?? Is it?? Mine isn't. It hasn't missed a beat since it's rebuild ~30k miles ago.

'The other important reason, is if you dont service it at regular intervals, with bills to prove it. No one will want to buy the car.'

This is probably the most truthful statement mentioned above.

Edited by Andy_mr2sc on Monday 6th March 21:12

You'd still have bills for the things that truly needed doing though. For sound engineering reasons.

[mistermexican]

Rather than financial savings, my question was meant to be more about questioning the schedule. Given that technology for component parts and oils has improved over the past 15 years it could have been the case that the schedules have not been updated to reflect these advances.

Or it could be that, in a unfortunately dwindling marketplace, specialists are keeping the same schedule to keep making a living. Or some of the more questionable specialists (I don't mean anyone in particular, but all there will be some) could just be saying it needs doing when it doesn't. I have experienced this myself with the Subaru. I went to a very well regarded specialist in Hinkley to fix an issue with my suspension, they relieved me of £750 and made the car worse and then claimed that it was the car's fault. Another customer took his car there for a rebuild and when it was on the dyno being remapped the engine blew and they charged him again for a new engine. He left over £15k lighter. You also have to question them when they charge over £150 for an oil change. So the lesson I learned there was to question everything, especially when a specialist says so, because I've been stung before.

Linked to this, in the Subaru community at least, there is a lot of incorrect information peddled that I feel is used to con people out of vast sums of money. Either that, or they don't know how the engine works, which is worrying as many of them run race teams. The best example I can think of is that all Subaru specialists (including the one mentioned above) think that if there are bubbles in the coolant expansion tank for the Impreza then there definitely is a head gasket failure. But this simply isn't true. If you look at Subaru's technical documents which can be found online, it clearly states that during and after hard driving the coolant passes through the turbo where it vapourises and blows off to the expansion tank. As the engine cools, it is sucked back into the system. So how many cars have had "faulty" head gaskets replaced (and possibly a rebuild) and their owners unfairly out of pocket because of this myth?

With regards to the F1 engine quote from Peter Wheeler, I always thought that a statement such as this could have been stretched a long way. I mean, how far do you take it? Could you say that the AJP is the same as an F1 engine because it has a crank, block, bearings, con rod and pistons? In which case almost any engine is the same as an F1 engine. The servicing frequency could also be down to how "liberal" TVR were with what they said e.g. BHP figures, the F1 quote, the safety debate, the lack of reliability denial.

Edited by mistermexican on Tuesday 7th March 11:08

[mistermexican]

m4tti said:

He probably also forgot that F1 engines were quad valve from very early on.. but most commonly the 60's after the cosworth DFV.


This is one of the quotes that came with the hocus pocus F1 thing

"The net result is that the Speed Eight has performed extremely well in the most gruelling test known to engineers: to give forty of them to TVR Tuscan racing drivers to try to blow up every weekend for the past five seasons."

Oh yes the most gruelling test known to engineers... drum roll.. the world re-knowned toughest endurance race on earth "The TVR tuscan championship"

Mister mexican .. curious, do you plan on using this as a daily driver?

This is my point, that's not real engineering testing. If it was real it would have been hooked up to a dyno and run for days on end at varying rev ranges to test it which is what other manufacturers do. So if this is the case, how accurate is the service schedule? Or is it simple over-cautiousness because of the lack of real testing?

Yup, daily driver. I hate it when cars just sit there not being used - it's a waste. That, and I feel that reliability increases when it's used frequently. Exactly the same thing with my STi. It was extremely low mileage when I bought it and lots of bits needed replacing (mainly brakes and refurbishing the suspension - Bilstein actually did it properly). I've used it as a daily driver ever since and it's so much better for it.

[mistermexican]

Andy_mr2sc said:

Reading that Mex it looks like you've rightly seen through the mist already!

Edited by Andy_mr2sc on Tuesday 7th March 11:46

Haha thanks! There's a lot of mist around in many communities. Hence my question and especially when my friend from GM is saying it's simply not necessary or it's overcautious. He's not low down either as he worked on the tuning of the C7 Corvette.

[mistermexican]

TVRMs said:

The other thing it does(to me at least) is it makes you think about hard use of a cold engine and what the correlation is between hot water and hot oil when wondering if the engine is actually at abuse temperature yet..

I agree. I don't know why manufacturers don't have an oil temp gauge (or how the coloured arc on the rev counter like BMW do) fitted, especially in performance cars as it matters as much as water temperature.

[mistermexican]

NCE 61 said:

Point taken and I'm happy to be proved wrong. But it's not clear if that's a single power run or endurance and reliability testing.

[mistermexican]

m4tti said:

Im going to go out there on a limb and say you are setting yourself up or a world of pain as a daily driver... it isn't put together like a production car, the underside is particularly exposed in comparison to a modern car. Theres no thick layer of under seal and no tight fitting under tray.

It will likely leak, or at best you will suffer from a load of condensation, so come winter you won't be enjoying yourself...

Add to that you need to be on your toes all the time, so at the end of a day when your tired and just want to come home from work and its p1ssing down you won't be able to afford to let your concentration drop.

Id have something else to run along side it at a minimum, and this is even before we examine the finer details of the parts employed.

This is also something for me to think about. I accept most people don't use them everyday but some people do, or at least claim to on this forum so it must be possible. The reason I thought I could is that my friend has an Elise and he used that everyday and didn't manage to crash (and he had no air conditioning). So my logic was that it was at least comparable to that. My daily drive is about 10 miles each way and the roads aren't too fast but I accept the point about if I'm on the motorway somewhere and it starts to tip it down. Surely leaks could be fixed and if it's serviced every 6k miles it could have waxoil added?

[mistermexican]

olliete said:

I've had an Elise - it is much easier to drive as a daily compared to a TVR. The lotus is fundamentally a simple car with limited space, little torque and perhaps a leaky hood.

TVR has the space to be practical but none of the chassis protection, too much torque to be fun in winter and is too light for the power for you to switch off and have fun most of the time. There is no point having a TVR as a daily - if you can afford one you can afford a hack to put the boring miles on

just in my opinion

I understand what you're getting at. I understand about the the high torque and lack of traction control but I don't have to press the throttle hard, just drive accordingly for the conditions as I would in any other car. And it never snows in Blackpool.